This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

A cop speaks out: Fiorito

In a recent column I suggested that, if cops are going to have Tasers, then they ought to give up their guns.

In that column I also repeated what an old cop told me, which is that any police officer worth his or her salt should have been able to board the back of Sammy Yatim’s streetcar and settle things with a nightstick.

It seems I riled a cop from Peel Region.

The officer wrote promptly, and at length. We pay him to carry a gun. You should know what he had to say.

He made it clear that he was speaking as an individual, and not for his employer. I have withheld his name as a courtesy.

Article Continued Below

I have edited his note slightly for length and punctuation, and have added my own comments, in bracketed italics, as follows.

The officer from Peel Region began by taking issue with his retired colleague, the one who is adept with a nightstick:

“The old cop you referred to must have retired 30 years ago and on top of that, must not have had a family or children that he was interested in coming home to.” (Oh, bosh.)

“Use-of-force training from day one educates officers that in lethal force situations, a firearm is always deployed.” (One word: overkill.)

“Pepper spray is not usually effective; I know from experience. And for a baton to be used, you have to be close enough to the subject that it puts you at risk of getting stabbed or slashed.” (Yes, well, conductors carry batons; but if a cop can’t use his to disarm a kid with a knife, then what’s the point of carrying one?)

“Tasers have only one shot, and if you miss, in a dynamic confrontation, there isn’t time to replace the cartridge.” (Dynamic? Sammy could have been contained if the cops had simply closed the streetcar doors; even so, if all the cops on the scene had Tasers, surely there would have been a sufficiency of voltage.)

“Officers are trained to maintain distance from edged-weapon armed subjects, the more the better. Someone can cover 20 feet in less than 2 seconds, not much time to react.” (Look at the video. Did Sammy charge? What was the rush?)

“Contrary to what I have read in your paper, in the real world there is no such thing as an itty bitty knife.” (Here, the officer cites the cases of five Ontario police officers who were stabbed; trouble is, the comparisons are inexact.)

“I have also read the 9/11 attackers used box cutters; perhaps also they are itty bitty knives?” (Two words: “Let’s roll.”)

“Police officers are trained to use the tools they are given in order to keep themselves and the public safe.” (Give a man a hammer and he will treat every problem like a nail; give a cop a gun . . .)

“We can’t diagnose mental illness or differentiate between illness, substance abuse or criminality when involved in sudden brief violent encounters with armed people that take seconds.” (In that case, cops aren’t getting the training they, and we, deserve; there was no brief violence from Sammy; once again, why not close the streetcar doors, fall back, and call for someone who can help?)

“My job is to go home at the end of my shift, in one piece.” (That’s the narrowest possible interpretation of a police officer’s job description; it’s also the broadest, since my goal, and the goal of every construction worker or grocery clerk, is precisely the same. But if that is the goal, then why does it say “To Serve and Protect” and not “To Get Home Safely” on the sides of our cop cars?)

“If someone refuses to put down a knife, and advances on me, I will do what’s required to keep myself, my partners and the public safe.” (How was the public kept safe when Forcillo fired his weapon one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine times?)

“Disarming knife-armed subjects with a baton is pure fantasy, and will likely get you stabbed or killed.” (If that’s the case, all cops who carry “batons” should demand better self-defence training.)

“Your article was not based on any kind of reality, and it is insulting to the policing community at large as well as the widows, orphans and families of murdered officers.” (I understand the sentiment. I intended no insult. Here’s the real insult: Sammy was deprived of the chance to marry, or to start a family.)

“I speak for myself; however, I’m sure the vast majority of my colleagues would agree with me.” (Of course they would; that’s the problem.)

The officer, of course, responded to my remarks. It’s clear I didn’t change his mind. Nor did he change mine. Not exactly a dialogue.

More from the Toronto Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com